tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-3133078502277941061.post1212080256007990325..comments2023-07-18T08:00:22.009-05:00Comments on Steinblog: Some Lessons From An Invisible Monster with Purple Skin! Unknownnoreply@blogger.comBlogger2125tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-3133078502277941061.post-75495602427093372352013-09-29T23:43:05.502-05:002013-09-29T23:43:05.502-05:00This one I think best describes the picture and co...This one I think best describes the picture and condition of these analytic approaches to God, where the only tools in the toolbox are logical truths that could not be otherwise except at wit's end. Not a single example of a truth that might impress empirically or admit to the slightest hint of anything real. Anonymousnoreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-3133078502277941061.post-40706685192213298762013-09-29T19:09:20.461-05:002013-09-29T19:09:20.461-05:00This is just a minor point--How could an invisible...This is just a minor point--How could an invisible thing be colored? Maybe this is part of your point, but I'd like to hear more about why you use this example and how you think it relates to the properties commonly attributed to God. <br /><br />The properties that are commonly ascribed to God have a theological/historical basis. There are various texts that claim that God is all-perfect. In addition, there is a kind of conceptual argument for God being perfect. You might find Johnston's semi-recent book on the topic of interest. Here's a link to his first chapter, which applies to your post: <br /><br />http://press.princeton.edu/chapters/s8978.pdf <br /><br />Jesse Steinberghttps://www.blogger.com/profile/08813039541965311670noreply@blogger.com